Reply With Quote
I see
Thanks
CARLSON: So on March 4, 6:35 in the morning, you're down in Florida, and you tweet, the former administration wiretapped me, surveilled me, at Trump Tower during the last election. How did you find out? You said, I just found out. How did you learn that?
TRUMP: Well, I've been reading about things. I read in, I think it was January 20 a "New York Times" article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend Bret Baier the day previous where he was talking about certain very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said, wait a minute, there's a lot of wiretapping being talked about. I've been seeing a lot of things.
Now, for the most part, I'm not going to discuss it, because we have it before the committee and we will be submitting things before the committee very soon that hasn't been submitted as of yet. But it's potentially a very serious situation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.c51ee1b359ef
So he's been on this wiretapping rant because of something he saw in FAKE NEWS.
Lolsmh our president
I see
Thanks
er is having a meltdown today on this. Trying to bring up previous NY times reports...most of which are concerning Russian financial servers etc.
He's doing the Chewbacca defense.
clinton was under oath. it's a big difference. lying isn't a crime, perjury is
edit: saw ur follow up post after
If it's such a big deal why is Sessions still the AG?
because he can weasel out of it due to the context of the question. its shady and misleading, but i dont think there's enough to go on
Interesting timing to release
Joint Unclassified Statement Before the Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives at a Hearing En led “Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act”
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...s-act%E2%80%9D
Lol pizza boy still reading tea leaves
The right is so paranoid they give Obama extra credit.
So now he can order other country's top intelligence agency to spy for him. Obama be ballin. Big Obama.
Is it really a lie if Trump wholeheartedly believes it to be true?
read up on the CANUKUS agreementThe right is so paranoid they give Obama extra credit.
So now he can order other country's top intelligence agency to spy for him. Obama be ballin. Big Obama.
https://luxexumbra.blogspot.com/2017...ffort.html?m=1
More from the Access to Information (ATI) files:
Some nice information here from the Isbister Report (Intelligence Operations in the Canadian Government, 9 November 1970) about how CBNRC (now CSE) set its intelligence processing tasks and priorities at that time:
Note especially the revelation that "the division of main responsibilities for SIGINT tasks [was] reached at a Tripar e (US-UK-Canada) SIGINT Conference in 1957 in the interests of avoiding unnecessary duplication. A working arrangement for the allocation of tasks was proposed by CBNRC/GCHQ/NSA. It was approved by [the Director of Communications Security] and reported in October 1957 to [the Communications Security Board] which exercised policy control before [the Intelligence Policy Committee] was formed."
A 1990 do ent (The Canadian Intelligence Community, 16 March 1990; discussed here earlier) adds the further detail that "Canada undertook to bear the main responsibility for the collection and analysis of SIGINT on the Soviet Arctic."
The passage also suggests that the 1957 division of effort may have been part of a larger Canada-United Kingdom-United States CANUKUS Agreement, the exact date of which has never been clear to me. (Tripar e COMINT conferences were already being held by the three countries by 1950.)
The allied division of effort was subsequently expanded to all of the Five Eyes members and covered "not only the exchange and exploitation of intelligence on Communist countries, but also on the most important strategic areas of the world."
Canada's decision to largely abandon its cryptanalysis program in 1957 was probably related to the task-allocation decisions made by the three partners that year. (CSE's cryptanalytic capabilities were revived in the 1980s.)
The end of the Cold War may well have spelled the end to any formal division of effort among the Five Eyes allies.
CSE's statutory mandate, added to the National Defence Act in 2001, specifies that CSE foreign intelligence collection must be done "in accordance with government of Canada intelligence priorities", and CSE Chief John Adams, testifying in 2007, denied that any sort of formal division of effort then existed among the allies:
The Chairman: Do protocols exist where you have divided up the spectrum, as it were?
Mr. Adams: No, they do not, senator. It is based purely on our priorities as defined by the government.
The Chairman: Allied countries do not get together and say, ``You seem to be doing fairly well in this area, but we have a bit of a gap over here; any chance of you moving into it?''
Mr. Adams: No, we do not. If it is important to Canada, we will be there, if we can get there, obviously.
In discussions, as I said earlier, knowing the priorities that we have, we would share if there are mutual priorities and mutual national interests.
That being said, I rather suspect that, formally or informally, one of our national intelligence priorities is to make sure that we continue to collect enough intelligence of sufficient interest to our Five Eyes allies to ensure that they continue to see value in sharing the intelligence they collect with us.
sounds like we're back to wmd's
Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA
So a bunch of tea n crumpets eating brits forced the whitehouse to retract and apologize? Sad!
America is looking sofT as right now smh.
You'll need to find a direct quote from er.Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA
As of now it's just "sources"
"Intelligence sources told The Telegraph that both Mr er and General McMaster, the US National Security Adviser, have apologised over the claims. "The apology came direct from them," a source said."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...q-wiretapping/
You blew your wad early.Having to not only retract comments made about the British spying on behalf of America, The WH was forced to apologized. TSA
Oh shut the up already.
They apologized. Had to. It was reported on by more credible news sites and networks.
If they didn't, then surely er and group will continue to say it was them..if they dont, clearly they did issue it and had to eat it.
Please reveal your credible sources and be sure they don't link back to the Telegraph article I linked.
The question was very deceptive. It was really a 2 part question. He should've said yes he spoke with the Russians. No they didn't talk about the Campaign. Screw Al Franken trying to trip up Sessions under oath.
Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians
Al Franken deceptively got me to lie to a question he never asked
Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians
Sessions said he never talked to the Russians about the Trump Campaign. Which is true. The last part is implied based on the question asked. You are just angry he wants to criminalize Marijuana.Franken never asked Sessions if he personally ever talked to the Russians
Trump to Merkel: we have something in common, wiretapping
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
